Readers write here


What is eight + 10 ?
Are you a bot?

There are 1175 entries available on

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 >

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 11-06-2014 9:31 am:

 7th BP
Sirs Our intention is not to point out that 7th BP retirees are the most affected.The retirees covered by 6th and 5th Bp agreements had also been equally perhaps affected more & the still alive who perhaps may be in their 80s and a few in their nineties.But the number of retirees under 7th BP are more than 25000. The basic pension maximum after a revision in 1989 had not been revised for the past 20 years and after an upward revision has not covered the retirees under 7th 6th and 5th BP agreements. I agree that representation by a collective body ,PENFED will yield results. But no sign of any such thing happening. .In the meantime IBA I understand has called the Bank Federations for talks which it appears is going to take place during the current week. Do we have any idea of the Federations' demands for the Pensioners?.Atleast anything is in their agenda? Whether the SBI working staff federations have consulted us before presenting Pensioners case to MGTS/GOVT/IBA. Whether the PENFED has also been involved in the negotiations not actively atleast as an observer? My only wish is whatever that had happened in the past should not get repeated . If we are unable to get the things done in this favorable new Govt's regime perhaps we may not be able to get the things done at anytime in future. The entire matter now rests with PENFED,Bank Federatins,IBA,SBI Mgt,and Govt and the final outcome depends upon the success of the negotiations. Highly hopeful of a positive final outcome to end the pensioners woes.I am very happy that this READERS WRITE HERE provides a good opprtunity at least to ventilate one's feelings and views for which I thank U much. With regards N SUBRAMANIAN
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,
Although we are not banking on it, but the demands of the serving employees' federations, for the 10th Bipartite settlement, include the expectations of pensioners.
As many as 33,000 pensioners of 7th bipartite (the number is so large, as it includes the large number of VRS optees) were cheated to accept pension calculated on their pre revised 6th Bipartite salaries.
Our Federation will approach the Govt. and also the Chairman, for resolving the issues which are resolvable.
Please keep writing. Its a pleasure to receive your posts and respond to them.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 10-06-2014 9:40 pm:

Mr.NS and Mr.ARC-You have struck the right chord.The Chairperson will obviously be involved because whether individual appeals are submitted to the Union Govt.or the PenFed meets the FM ,details and opinion will be called for from SBI for ascertaining facts.Whatever has happened in the past cannot also be papered over and without highlighting total facts the impact of request/appeal will be that much reduced.And as both of you have highlighted
meeting the Chairperson/FM/PM need not be delayed and appointments could be sought for whatever be the agenda.The only catch is that we,the 7th.BPs are a reducing breed and our need has assumed that much urgency.Sujoy Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
We reiterate that whether it is the Chairman, or the PM, or FM, no individual representation on a collective cause, is likely to make an impact. Remedy is possible only through a collective and representative body.
The Federation will make this fresh approach very soon. As far as the reduction in the breed is concerned, the entire breed of pensioners is in the hit list, not just 7th Bipartite pensioners. But if its a question of gross anomaly in fixation of their pension, their issue stands out, even in comparison to the earlier pensioners, who are reducing at a higher rate.

A.R.Chandrasekharan (Website) wrote at 10-06-2014 12:23 pm:

 Pension 7th Retirees
Dear Sir,

I sincerely thank you for your kind aMy knd sincere response to my questions. Good. I give my best to members though I am not a committee or EC member at Chennai Circle. My keen interest in the matter makes me to contact or collect information which our Circle never does. Let us wait and see but one thing is sure that unless PenFed takes some effective steps nothing will move. To meet the Chairman why should they delay. to the best of my knowledge the 7th problem was solved long by Mr.Nadaf but own colleagues spoilt it. Before 9th concluded it was solved. Bad luck spoilt the whole exercise. Sir, please accept my sincere thanks and you cannot give better reply than what you have given and once again I thank yoou Mr.sujoy Gosh.
Comment: Dear Mr Chandrasekharan,
We are fortunate to have such pensioners like you as active participants in our website. There is no point in looking forward and ruing the chances lost. Let us look ahead. It is a pleasure to respond to your posts. Please keep writing.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 10-06-2014 9:00 am:

 7th BP
Mr Sujoy My only concern is that on no account Our Chairperson should be bye-passed and only after reaching consensus on all the issues relating to the pensioners on priority basis the PENFED should approch the GOVT for a joint discussion. On no account we should club the 10th wage talk settlement issue with the settlement of pensioners' issues as the former is a never ending process and how long it will take to conclude the settlement that only GOD knows.There is a proverb that you should strike the iron when it is red hot. No time should be lost- the earlier it is better. I request the PENFED to give top priority for solving our issues and bring the matter to an end at the earliest.N>SUBRAMANIAN
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,
You are right. The Pensioners' Federation will hopefully, meet the Chairman and the new Govt. ministers, very soon. If 10th Bipartite settlement does any good to pensioners, it is welcome. But under no circumstances, should we link it to the talks with the Chairman and the new Govt.
We strongly feel that individual approaches arising from sheer frustration, may be understandable, but such representations do not make much impact. Only the collective strength of our 1.3 lac strong Federation can successfully negotiate the demands of pensioners. We had relied perhaps too long on the two serving employees' Federations for too long a time.

A.R.Chandrasekharan (Website) wrote at 09-06-2014 9:08 pm:

 Pension - 7th Bipartite
Dear Sir,
I thank you for your kind response.I still unable to understand why the PenFed is not openly coming out to support the 7th retirees and trying to convince that once the 50% is solved the 7th gets automatic relief.The PenFed is also a party in the case filed by Hyderabad Circle retired leader MrLakshmi Narasaiah. This fact was not brought out even in 184/2011. Mr.Murthy told that the Federation has not filed any case of its own in any other court and only impleaded in the Hyderabad Case. Is it not a supressin of act and if the Court comes to know about it and dismisses the case stating that they could wait until the case is completed.What will be the position for 50/40 at least. Mr.Umesh Sharma has given a mail stating that the there was a discussion with the Bank and feed back is on the positive side and he will come back with good news by the end of the month. Can you through some light on this please. Now time is ripe and when the PenFed will form a committee and meet the chairman? If the Chairman agrees and assures that she will get the approval for the letter sent on 19th June 2006 will be PenFed agree and solve the problem of 7th or will it reject her offer come back to square number one. also there will be a meeting on the 13th of this month. Will there be any discussion over the 7th retirees pension? Will UFBU be steady in achieveing pension for the 7th? Whether the Memorandum submitted by the 3 unions on 16th April will have any effect Please advise. .
Comment: Dear Mr Chandrasekharan,
You have asked a wide variety of question, all very valid. But its difficult to respond on behalf of the Federation. So far, we have replied on the basis of the tentative plans of our Federation. The Supreme Court petition had consciously avoided mention of 7th Bipartite pensioners, as there were numerous cases pending in different High Courts, and filing a petition on the same matter would not have been permissible. But the crux of the case is seeking 50% of last drawn average salary as pension for the pensioners. This would automatically solve the problem of all pensioners, including 7th Bipartite pensioners.
The dialogue with the Chairman and the new Govt will commence soon, and continue with the progress of the court cases. We cannot clarify beyond this from our Association. We do hope that this response has been of some help to you.

N.subramanian (Website) wrote at 09-06-2014 7:02 pm:

 7th BP
I refer to my views communicated on 8th and by way of further clarification I want to say that I referred to only the SBI Award Staff and Sup.staff Fedns and not the PENFED as PENFED is not one of the signatories to the 8th and the 9th BP agreements. In fact the Fedns should have fought with the Mgt/Govt and also shd have gone to the court as ultimately the worst affected are the retirees who were hitherto the active members of the Fedns until their retirement. Unfortunately the Fedns have let them down very badly because of which the PENFED has to fight on behalf of the aggrieved . Thank you. Kindly keep the members informed of all the developments thru this column which I find very useful for ventilating the members' feelings and also in helping them to get clarification to their various doubts. With regards N.Subramanian
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,
Thanks for appreciating our efforts. We are all striving in our own ways, for the same cause. Reduction of suffering for pensioners. Please keep in touch.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 09-06-2014 4:02 pm:

 Posts on this site
My post on the observation of Mr.Dipak Kumar Basu of the 7th.June has been withdrawn/deleted..Sujoy Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
Please appreciate that without showing any disrespect to anyone, we do not want this website to become a platform for settling personal differences. We had no option but to withdraw your post, as it would have set off a chain of posts. We have been compelled to edit out a part of this post too, for the same reason.
Let us all channelise our efforts towards one and the only cause, viz. reduction of suffering of pensioners. This should not become a quarelling ground. We are sure you will appreciate. Do keep writing.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 08-06-2014 8:11 pm:

 7th BP
Ref invited to the views of Sri ARC and the clarifications furnished.The Pension fund Rules of the Bank provide for 50% of the average pay drawn and proposal for payment at 50% was forwarded originally by the Bank in 2002 itself however no action was initiated by the Govt on the Bank's recommendations. It was then revised and fresh recommendations were submitted by the Bank in 2006 for payment of pension on 50%/40% formula may be the revision at the instance of the Govt ie the revised formula was imposed on the Bank by the Govt which was not objected to by both the workoing staff fedns for reasons known to them only. However the revision was made applicable only for those retired on or after 1-10 2002 0nly which had in effect excluded the persons retired under 7th BP Scale. No revision of pension,no DA neutralisation were the main anomolies caused due to the above. The PENFED was forced to legal remedy as the MOF stated that the matter had already been dealt with and it had to be treated as closed. Once payment of pension at 50/40 % formula is accepted there will be discrimination amongst the retirees one class receiving at 50% and another class receiving at 40% which ultravires the provisions of pension fund rules. This will be a permanent damage and it can not be reversed in future and the effect will be carried over to the future generation of retirees which will be the greatest injustice that the PENFED will be doing to all the SBI pensioners. Now there is a change in the Govt with a positive outlook which has to be encashed by the PENFED. Our Chairman is favorably inclined to consider the Pensioners'appeal as she is well aware of the injustice done to us. Best thing now to do in my view is to take a delegation to the Chairman in the matter first convince her with our demands and thereafter approach MOF/PMO with an appeal for an earlier solution to our problems instead of pursuing the court cases and depending much on them. With regards N.Subramanian
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,
The Fed has never accepted the 50%/40% formula, arbitrarily imposed on pensioners. The court case was filed specifically to ensure that through implementation of Rule 23(i), and declaration of Rule 23(ii), which permits reduction of pension or imposition of ceilings, as ultra vires.
Our Fed has already decided to approach the Chairman and the new Govt to remedy the ills of pensioners, primarily the injustice meted out to the 7th Bipartite pensioners, who are still getting pension on the basis of their 6th Bipartite salaries.
The court cases can be withdrawn only after the benefits are made available to the pensioners.

A.R.Chandrasekharan (Website) wrote at 08-06-2014 4:50 pm:

 7th Bipartite Pension
Dear Sir,
Why not the PenFed First solve the issue of 7th and then proceed with other court cases since the prayer in the 1875/ 2013 has a different prayer. Next, the GS of PenFed earlier wanted all the cases to be poold at once court i.e.Sc so that one judgement will clear the whoseissue. Now he tells that no case should be attached since it takes a long time to; issue notices and then proceed.What is the stand of the PenFed. Will it be below the dignity of the PenFed if it approaches the chairman and obtains the approval of the proposal sent on 19th June 2006 which states that Rs.14240/- as cut off stage and above that 40%. If they delay still then the 100 days programme of the Govt. will come to an end and it may take its own time. In the name of solving the issue for all the 30k to 35k pensioners are put to hardship for no fault of their. Also, PenFed cannot claim its unawareness of; the 50% policy till 16th March of 2011 for proceeding to SC under Article 32 which could have been done earlier.
Comment: Dear Mr Chandrasekharan,
1. The Fed had delayed filing the case in Supreme Court on the assurance of the 2 serving employees' Feds that the 9th Bipartite will resolve the injustice & anomalies of pension.
2. The case seeks 50% pension for all, and thus covers the 7th Bipartie pensioners too.
3. While the court cases continue, the Fed has already decided to approach the Chairman again, as also the new Govt with such matters as the gross injustice meted to the 7th Bipartite retirees
4. Ckubbing of cases sounds logical, but causes inordinate delay.
Please do not lose faith and hope in the collective strength of the Fed.

Dipak Kumar Basu wrote at 07-06-2014 10:24 pm:

 Utilisation of this WEB SITE
It seems this web-site is being used by some of the pensioners to settle their personal acrimony and also to highlight their wisdom. Any pensioner may raise any of his doubts and queries in this site and it is expected that it would be clarified by the Association.
Comment: Dear Dipak,
You are absolutely right. This is the official website of our Association. This should not be used for settling personal scores and discussing personal agenda. One is free to criticize the functioning or the decisions of the Association or Federation. But denigrating or belittling the unity and collective strength of our Association is not expected from wise and aged pensioners. Any malicious or harmful comment will be deleted.

SUBHASH CHANDRA HAZRA wrote at 07-06-2014 5:15 pm:

Comment: Dear Subhas,
We entirely agree with your views and the underlying feelings. It is no crime to differ in views and contest an election. But slinging mud and dragging the Association to Court, on whatever pretext, and thereby lowering the esteem of pensioners, cannot be supported.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 06-06-2014 10:35 pm:

 Elections-Court case
Admin-Looks like a bit of a mess! Please keep a copy of the petition ready,if possible, and I will collect it on Thursday.Alternatively a scan copy could be sent to my e-mail address. I am asking for it for transparency not to get involved in any litigation.I am the last person to spend any money on court cases.Kindly let me know.Sujoy Kumar Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
This is unfortunate and was definitely avoidable. But, trust us. Its not a mess. The harassment caused by the last minute postponement of the election, is indeed regrettable. But as far as the Association's activities and broader issues, nothing is affected.
You are most welcome to come to our office and see for yourself the contents of the petition.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 06-06-2014 1:09 pm:

 SBI PenAss,BenCir
Mr.Tushar Kumar Mukherjee-your post of 5th.June 2014.Without having a look at the petition it would not be proper for anyone to offer any comment or observation.Since the SBIPA,BC are the other party can I request them to post a copy of the petition filed and then come to some conclusion about it being right or wrong.It appears that a panel of candidates are being put forth/propogated instead of individual candidates.After the elections are over the elected candidates may themselves elect the office bearers.Any way a look at the petition is desirable.Sujoy Kumar Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
We have received a notice from the advocate of two candidates, who had filed the petition. This notice has quoted an extract from the ad interim order of injunction, delivered ex parte. Without debating on the contents of the petition (which will not be proper too) it would suffice to say that differences of opinion among pensioners should not have reached the Court. A lot of harassment and unnecessary expenses have been imposed on the Association and its members. Litigation expenses on this issue is very avoidable. The petition is too voluminous to be uploaded on this site. Members desirous of getting more information, may visit the Association office.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 06-06-2014 12:39 pm:

 7tt BP

A.R.Chandrasekharan (Website) wrote at 05-06-2014 9:49 pm:

 7th Bipartite Pension
Dear Sir.
Our Chairman met the previous FM and had a discussion about the 7th and asked the out flow of the amount etc. Why not our PenFed meet our Chairman and request her to take up the matter with the FM and proper explanation about the injustice done to 7th by the previous Finance Minister Chidambaram and the intention of the Bank to pay for 7th on the last drawn salary as per the proposal sent during April 2006 recommending the JMG scale of Rs.14240 with a minimum of Rs.7120/- Why PenFed is not making an attempt on this? She could also still impress by proving that the previous Government neither rejected nor approved. the Chennai High Court also given a judgement advising the Govt. to consider and approve the proposal. This will strengthen the case. Or if the Gove. withdraws the appeal on this ourder the problem will be solved. Why not PenFed resort to this way to solve the 7th issue
Comment: Dear Mr Chandrasekharan,
You are absolutely right. This is what our Federation, has decided to do, according to information available with us. Let us not lose hope.

TN Ramachandran Nair wrote at 05-06-2014 8:59 pm:

 Pension issue of 7th Bipartite persons
When I mentioned about SC Rindani, I only meant that his inclusion will facilitate better in bringing out our problems particularly of the 7th bipartite pensioners. Yes, when the delegation goes to meet PM/FM naturally a well drafted representation explaining the issues clearly needs to be handed over. There is no two opinion about this.
Comment: Dear Mr Nair,
You have rightly stressed the need for making a strong and effective representation to the new Govt, for rectifying the injustice meted out to 7th Bipartite pensioners. A collective decision by the Federation, about the contents of the memorandum, will obviously be better than any individual effort.

TUSHAR KUMAR MUKHERJEE wrote at 05-06-2014 8:46 pm:

On receiving an application from a member, City Civil Court, Kolkata, ordered an injunction over the ensuing election process of SBIPA (BC). Personally I am not in favour of such move. Only the advocates of both the parties are beneficial out of such court cases. Even if the applicant gets a verdict in his favour , what will happen ? Some minor changes in the election process - nothing more. But such court case deprieves a large number of members of their franchise for quite some time. I feel that one should think more seriously the pros and cons of it before taking such step.
Comment: Dear Tushar,
You have voiced the feelings of a huge majority of pensioners, who are disappointed that despite such elaborate arrangements, they will not be able to cast their votes, indefinitely. Lot of legal expenses, and lot of energy of elderly pensioners, will now be utilised not against the Govt or IBA, but against fellow pensioners. Who will benefit ?

Sudhir Suman Kumaria (Chandigarh Circle) wrote at 05-06-2014 3:27 pm:

 New-Form-SBI-REMBS-Reimbursement, Claim Form by Near Relatives of Deceased Member & list of SBI Holiday Homes
We have uploaded the following file, which you can download from SBI Pensioners’ Association (Chandigarh Circle) official website: http://www.sbipensionerschd.com/

1. New-Form-SBI-REMBS-Reimbursement of Domiciliary Treatment.
2. Claim Form by Near Relatives of Deceased Member of SBI-REMBS.
3. Latest list of SBI Holiday Homes.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 05-06-2014 11:41 am:

The need of the hour which is more urgent and important is settlement of 7th BP retirees issues. The salary updation, gratuity issue are neverthless important but the issues are to be solved for the whole banking industry as the issues involved have to be taken up by all the REtired banking Pensioners Fedns. Let us not club such issues with the present issues relating to 7th BP retirees and make the process of settlement delayed. Revision of Pension based on the 7th BP scale, DA neutralisation for 7th bp retirees are the most important issues to be solved and if possible the 50% of Basic Pension for which the PENFED has filed a suit should also be settled thru bilateral talks. If these issues can be settled that will be a great achievement for the PENFED. The effective retrospective date of implementation also has to be arrived at and concluded so that there will be some meaning for the long wait. With best wishes N>SUBRAMANIAN
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,
Thanks for your wishes. We are all waiting for the injustices meted out to pensioners, to be rectified at the earliest. Time is running out for many of us. Yet, we cannot give up.

Mihir Kumar Das wrote at 05-06-2014 12:21 am:

 Restrospective effect of enhanced Gratuity.
Dear Sir
It was our expectation to get the enhanced
Gratuity,those who have retired prior 24/05/2010.But it is our ill-luck we were deprived of that. But the pensioners other than the Banking Industry, they are lucky enough and they got the same with effect from January, 2006. Some pensioners have filed W.P. in Kerala High Court but the fate of the case under cloud.
It is my appeal that the matter may please be taken up by our Pensioners' Federation with a priority basis and thus a huge number of pensioners will be benefitted.
thaking You,
Mihir Kuamr Das.
Comment: Dear Mihir,
Thanks for writing. Yes, we are equally concerned about the pensioners who have been deprived of gratuity. But we happen to get our gratuity under Gratuity Act, and not under Gratuity Rules applicable to Govt employees. Other bank employees have got it under Service Gratuity.
The Kerala High Court case is pending before another single Judge bench, after the earlier lady judge refused to give an order.

K.MAHENDRAN wrote at 04-06-2014 9:47 pm:

 Pending case of enhasement of Gratituy at KERALA High court
Please give me latest position of WP of enhancement of Gratituy,long pending in kerala High court for retirees before 24/05/2010--- mahendran (AP)
Comment: Dear Mr Mahendran,

This case was not filed by any Association or by our Federation. It was filed by a group of individual pensioners, affected by the non implementation of enhanced gratuity with retrospective effect.
The case was heard by a single Judge bench in Kerala High Court, but no verdict was given and the case was assigned to another single judge bench by the Chief Justice. It is lying pending since long.

Ashok Roy wrote at 04-06-2014 4:18 pm:

 Holiday Home booking
I wish to book our Holiday Home at Delhi and Hardwar in the month of December,2014.How,when and to whom,I need to apply?
Comment: Dear Ashok,
You have to apply through your pension paying branch, to the Secretary, Circle Welfare Committee, SBI, Kol LHO (8th Floor) in the prescribed format, just like serving employees.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 04-06-2014 12:10 pm:

Mr.N.Subramanian-Yes, after our case is settled other issues can be taken up.In my appeal,I have mentioned,inter alia, that three single bench Judges of three High Courts-Kerala,Madras and Calcutta have decreed in favour of the 7th.BPs and that because of the 'adjournment syndrome' the cases are pending for long.Any as you say, it is the final arbiter of all things great and small who will take a call on our fate and destiny.Sujoy Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
Our Fed is working on this issue. We dont think that individual appeals, howsoever genuine, cant make an effective impact on the Govt. We dont want to belittle any individual efforts, but we believe collective organisational approach is always preferable, when the issue concerns 33 thousand pensioners.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 04-06-2014 8:31 am:

 7th BP
I totally in agreement with the views expressed by Mr Sujoy. Before embarking upon the pensioners issues it should be the PENFED's endeavor to settle the long pending issues of the 7th BP retirees first. An injustice has been done which has to be reversed immediately. Depending upon the court proceedings and favorable verdict will be a long drawn process .Even though the time is now ripe the New Govt is yet to stabilize, complete the budget session which is of top most important and should have some breathing time to hear us ,our case with patience. Therefore we have to wait for an opportune time to fix up appointments with the PM/FM to present our case. Better the topic is taken up before the next date of hearing. Whatever I say whatever is going to happen will happen Let us pray the God Supreme for HIS divine intervention to get the issue solved and justice rendered at the earliest. Eith regards N. subramanian
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,
We entirely agree.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 03-06-2014 9:23 pm:

Sri Rohit Sharma,TN Ramachandran and others--It would appear that along with meeting the FM/PM a written appeal would have to be submitted.For the sake of transparency it would be desirable to post a draft of the appeal on this site so that the 7th.BP alone is taken up in the first instance.At the second meeting other issues may be taken up after the 7th.BPs are solved.I remember Mr.Rindani when he visited Calcutta LHO sometime in 1991/92 for the appointment of one Mr.Karketa P.O who had graduated only in pass course in a, the then truncated course,courtesy,the CPM government. He may be useful but let us not play the Gujarat card-it will not impress Mr.Modi.Only the merit of our case has to be stressed.Incidentally I have submitted an appeal to the PM/FM.Sujoy Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
You are entitled to submit appeals to anyone. But as you have already done so, without discussing the contents with the Association, it will be better to leave the Federation to chart out its own path. We too desire that the injustice done to the 7th BP pensioners at the earliest.

TN Ramachandran Nair wrote at 03-06-2014 3:16 pm:

 Pension issue of 7th Bipartite persons
I fully agree with Rohit Sharma's suggestion to include Shri Suresh Rindani in the delegation to meet Prime Minister and apprise him of our predicament. Sureshbhai doesn't require any introduction among the Bank's trade union community. He is such a wonderful personality and I am sure he can really bring a satisfactory solution to the issue.

Rohit Sharma. wrote at 02-06-2014 9:50 pm:

 7th B.P. V.R.S.
1. We have one Mr S.C. Rindani (Ex- G.S. Sup.Staff Association Ahmedabad Circle) as a representative of the PENFED from Ahmedabad Circle. He has better contact with the P.M. Narendra Modi. PENFED can invite Mr. S.C. Rindani to be a part of the delegation when they meet the P.M.
Comment: Dear Mr Sharma,
We are confident that our Fed will utilize all possible advantages, when they prepare their team to meet the PM and FM and others.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 02-06-2014 9:16 pm:

My only request to the PENFED President/General Secretary is to make all out efforts to approach the FM/PM of the New Govt and get settled the issues relating to the 7th BP retirees at the earliest so that the pensioners who are in their 70s and 80s just counting years and are at the threshold of the other world will get some benefits before their end and can enjoy the fruits of their long waiting .
Comment: Dear Mr. Subramanian,
You are absolutely right in giving vent to your feelings. To the best of our knowledge, our Fed GS has already initiated efforts in this direction.

A.R.Chandrasekharan (Website) wrote at 02-06-2014 6:02 pm:

Dear Mr.Ghosh,
I thank you for your response.Iagree with you but we have to wait for the out come since every pensioner of 7th is having highest hopes on the New Government.I find even individuals started giving mails and also AIBRA alreadyl sent representations to the Preime Minister and Finance Minister.Every one is very much concerned and they especially SBI pensioners expect at DA neutralaization should be approved. I thank you once again Sir

Sudhir Suman Kumaria (Chandigarh Circle) wrote at 31-05-2014 11:29 pm:

 Pensioners’ Mail June-2014
We have uploaded pdf file of Chandigarh Circles’ Monthly Bulletin Pensioners’ Mail for the month of June 2014.

Which you can download from SBI Pensioners’ Association (Chandigarh Circle) official website:- http://www.sbipensionerschd.com/
Comment: Dear Mr Kumaria,
Thanks once again. Do keep in touch.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 31-05-2014 5:36 pm:

 7th BP
Just endorsing the views of Mr Sujoy. this time when the Pensioners issues for improvement is going to be taken up with the FM,Govt it should be ensured that again the interests of the 7th BP retirees should not be sacrificed and they should not become again scapegoats. Enough we have waited and there should be some meaning for our waiting also.
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,
Your feelings are very understandable. But please note that our Fed never sacrificed the interests of the 7th BP pensioners. They have been fighting against this, ever since the damage was allowed to be done by the Staff Fed and Officers Fed during the 8th BP. Our Fed is bound to undo the injustice meted out to 7th BP pensioners soon. Lets not give up.

A.R.Chandrasekharan (Website) wrote at 31-05-2014 4:17 pm:

 7th Bipartite Pension
Dear Sir,
I went through the replies given to various pensioners questions and all said and done the penfed should have taken up the anamoly of 30000 pensioners separately. But the injustice done to 7th has not been properly high lighted in the SC petition. I appreciate the GS of PenFed that at last he came to realise that the Bank and the serving organisations did not help the pensioners specially seventh. Now the point of mine is whether the PenFed has one rank one pension policy at all. 8th and 9th are getting 50/40 whether 7th is getting the same. No. So, instead of simply telling that the 50% will solve 7th also is neither convinsing nor acceptable. If a PenFed refusses to take up the anamoly of 30000 pensionersn then what is the use. First they should set the house which is fading condition and then think of Bengalow. So, the PenFed should first solve the 7th. The GS of PenFed should think of the lives of the 30000 pensioners.
Comment: Dear Mr Chandrasekharan,
You have rightly voiced the anguish and pain of the 30k cheated pensioners of 7th Bipartite. Our Fed couldnt make this the major legal point in Supreme Court, as numerous cases on 7th BP, were pending in various High Courts. However, by asking for 50% of last average salary as pension, all deprived pensioners' grievances including those of 7th BP ones have been covered. Let us strive and wait.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 31-05-2014 3:18 pm:

 7th BP
The most affected are the pensioners retired covered by the 7th BP Scale. Their grievances should be addressed first and solved Again the PENFED or Working Unions Fedns should not club and sidetrack the issues and make it complicated and drag on further.We are fully awared of the issues involved and the PENFED should see that the case of 7th BP retirees are first takenup and cleared before embarking upon other improvements for all the pensioners as a whole .

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 31-05-2014 3:02 pm:

Admin.--Thank you for your response.Never for a second I hold the PenFed responsible for the 7th.BP imbroglio.It was the Working Unions at that time who sold us out. My letter in fact mentions that aspect.It will be interesting to know who were in the negotiating team at that time and whether any of them belonged to the 7th.BPs or retired in the 8th./9th.BP.It was not the IBA which settled the SBI package as in other Banks.It was the SBI and the working unions of the SBI That is also mentioned'bartered'.But be that as it may the Penfed will have on it's agenda issues like 100% DA neut.50% pension and may be other issues and in the process of negotiation one or a few issues have to be sacrificed and I am apprehensive it will, and not may, be the 7th.BPs.since not many,out of 27529, are still alive.We do not even know what is on the agenda of our Penfed.Can you enlighten us?Any way let us wait and watch.Sujoy Ghosh

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 31-05-2014 12:32 pm:

Mr.N.Subramanian-Your post of the 31st.May 2014.Thank you for sharing the optimism.Admin-Your observation of the 30th.May 2014--The Penfed will have a different agenda and multiples of it in the overall interest of all SBI pensioners.For the 7th.BPs a singular effort is required and after that is solved the Penfed may take up other issues.With too much on the agenda negotiations will become complicated and in the process of sacrificing any item the 7th.BPs may again be the casualty as in the 7th.Bipartite negotiaions stage itself in or around 1997.Sujoy Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
The 7th Bipartite scandal was not the handiwork of Pensioners' Federation. You may be aware that pensioners of other nationalized banks, including those of 7th Bipartite, are getting 50% of their revised salary as pension. There is still scope for the Govt to extend this provision for SBI pensioners. We are optimistic that the Federation with its collective strength will be able to convince the new Govt. into taking remedial action. Over 30,000 pensioners can't be cheated permanently.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 31-05-2014 7:11 am:

 7th BP
True. The three major Pensioners Fedns have submitted a jt memorandum to the Govt,RBI,Bank Managements,IBA for redressal of the pensioners' woes espy 7th BP retirees and it will be very nice and appropriate that they meet the app.authority in Govt for a discussion in the matter and solve the issues involved Kindly keep the pensioner members posted with developments in the matter as and when they take place for their information. I am of the firm view that certainly we will get justice during the time of the BJP govt headed by Mr ModiJi and Mr Jaitely FM. With regards N.SUBRAMANIAN
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,
We join you and thousands of pensioners, in hoping, with renewed vigour, for happier days.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 30-05-2014 9:30 pm:

 7th BP
Dear Sujoy A welcoming approach. I on behalf of myself and all the 7th BP retirees wish YOU all the best and let your appeal bring forth positive results. I pray God to shower His grace on you for the good work you are upto With Love.SUBRAMANIAN N
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,
We laud the zeal of Sujoy and other prensioners to try to get a redressal of the 7th BP pensioners. But we feel that the impact of a colletive thrust of our Federation, will be much more effective on the new Govt. They have already worked out plans or this.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 30-05-2014 2:32 pm:

Mr.Bharat Bhusan-your entry of 28.05.2014.Interesting! But how do you propose to bell the cat?I have started a draft on our agony, to Mr.Arun Jaitley,FM and will have a copy for Mr. Narendra Modi,PM since he is also looking after Pensions though not necessarily of other than Central Govt. employees.Similar to 'workers of the world unite,you have nothing to lose but your chains'for 7th.BPs'take up cudgels, it can't get worse'.I will be sending it in a few days when the Parl.session will be over.So here's to good luck.Smile and the world smiles with you.Sujoy Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
We wish you best of luck on your solo efforts. You will be glad to know that our Federation has already started its efforts to convince the new Govt about the urgent need to undo the wrongs done to our bank's pensioners, specially those of 7th Bipartite.

bharat bhushan wrote at 28-05-2014 4:40 pm:

 pension issue
we can talk to FM
Comment: Dear Mr Bhushan,
You will be glad to know that our Federation has already started working on this.

Raghunathan.T wrote at 27-05-2014 4:05 pm:

 Appeal to our PM
All citizens can interact with our PM thro the website pmindia.nic .in.We can make good use of it to voice our grivances.
SBI Pensioner from Chenni Circle.
Comment: Dear Mr Raghunathan,
You have rightly pointed at this opportunity. However, sporadic mails sent by pensioners, may not tell the whole story of deprivation of so many thousands of pensioners all over the country. Our Federation must effectively draw the attention of the new PM.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 27-05-2014 11:04 am:

The Hon'ble PM has retained,inter alia,Public Grievance,and Pensions.Do I see a ray of light?It may be more desirable to submit a representation to the PM directly about the discrimination of the 7th.BPs.It will be referred to the FM and we can hope for a redress.Sujoy Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
A good and welcome thought. Thanks. We shall have to renew our representations, with a new focus, while continuing our legal battles.

Dipak Kumar Basu wrote at 26-05-2014 9:24 am:

 Ensuing Election
We may upload the entire election shdule as declared by Returning Officer.

Dipak Basu
Comment: Dear Dipak,
You will observe that a news item about the holding of elections of our GB & Kolkata Zonal Committee (from 6th to 20th June, 2014), for the period 2014 - 2017, has been uploaded in the page "Current News". The entire schedule has since been uploaded separately.

Sudhir Suman Kumaria (Chandigarh Circle) wrote at 25-05-2014 10:49 pm:

 8th Bipartite Retirees--Fixation of pension from 1/05/2005 in relation to FPA component:
We have come across discrepancy in the fixation of pension of 8th Bipartite retirees in some of the Circles. The 8th bipartite salary Structure became applicable for payment from 1/11/2002.
IN THE CASE OF SUPERVISING STAFF the FPA (Fixed Personal Allowance) was payable from 1/11/2004. Those who retired between 1/11/2002 and 31/10/2004 their FPA was based on 7th Bipartite pension and thus calculated on old salary structure. As a result many pensioners are receiving less pension than what they are entitled to. If you are a 8th Bipartite Retiree please check your pension. Please contact your Association Office for guidance in the matter and also advice at:- sbipabhc@gmail.com

Please also visit www.sites.google.com/site/sbipabhc/latest-updates

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 25-05-2014 7:53 pm:

 7th BP
The new Government under Mr Modi going to be in place from 26th and I hope that we can get the injustice done to the 7th BP retirees reversed through proper representation highlighting the anomolies. In October 2002 itself our bank has submitted a proposal for sanction of 50% of pay which is still to be cleared. Now in the present set up the department of banking affairs which is looking after our issues cannot postpone things without any acceptable reasons. Now the time is ripe for our Pensioners Fedn to meet the Finance Ministry for a discussion and getting our issue solved.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 24-05-2014 1:06 pm:

Refer Unknown and Mr.V.Madhavan of 24.05.2014--The next date will be known only after the 2nd.June 2014 when the court reopens.Meanwhile Mr.Salil Ghosh has been given a copy of the paper book.Since November 2013 till date several dates have passed without any hearing or orders.After the new CJI joins at Calcutta High Court a date can be expected.
Sujoy Ghosh

Unknown wrote at 24-05-2014 9:52 am:

 7th Bipartite Pensioners

APOT No.549 of 2012
GA No.3135 of 2012
WP No.1317 of 2009
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction



Date : 25th November, 2013.

Mr. Ashim Kr. Routh, Mr. Sudip Pal
Chowdhury for the appellants.
Mr. Haradhan Banerjee for the respondent.

The Court : This appeal would be heard. Mr. Haradhan Banerjee, learned Counsel appears for the sole respondent. Hence service of notice of appeal is dispensed with.

The appellants are directed to file requisite number of informal paper book incorporating all papers used before the learned Single Judge within four weeks from date. As soon as paper book is filed, place the appeal for hearing. In default, place it for final order.
We are told, the respondent already assured this Court, they would not move any application for contempt. Hence we need not pass any order of stay.
The order impugned would abide by the result of the appeal.

GA No.3135 of 2012 is disposed of without any order as to costs.



V MADHAVAN wrote at 24-05-2014 9:36 am:

 7th Bipartite Pensioners
greetings to all. Mr. N Subramanian wrote at 21-05-2014 5:42 pm expressing the lack of care for this group of pensioners. It would be a point of interest to note that the petition of Mr. Salil Kumar Ghosh has been favourably decided in 2012 itself. A purposeful follow up of this judgment is the need of the hour to redress the grievance. On 25th November, 2013 in APOT No.549 of 2012 - GA No.3135 of 2012 - With
WP No.1317 of 2009 the court has directed the file requisite number of informal paper book incorporating all papers used before the learned Single Judge within four weeks
from date. Could some on in Bengal Circle publish the final order.
Comment: Dear Mr Madhavan,
You have already got a reply from Sujoy, to the effect that the matter is now to be decided after court reopens and new CJ reports.

kaushikkumar wrote at 24-05-2014 3:55 am:

 revised gratuity
Comment: Dear Kaushik,
We have replied elsewhere that we in SBI were entitled to gratuity under Gratuity Act, and not uder Gratuity Rules applicable to Govt employees. In any case, the matter is pending before Kerala High Court Single Judge Bench, after Supreme Court refused to hear it directly.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 21-05-2014 10:03 pm:

 7th.BPs and Delhi High Court case
Mr.N.Subramaniam-your post of 21.05.2014.You are so very right and have expressed a very positive opinion.We can very well write to the Chairperson and simultaneously take up with the GOI who will call for the views of SBI,in any case.And, as you say that SBI has taken up the issue with the previous FM,presumably it is still pending and so our representation will buttress the Cahirperson's recommendations. But PenAss,Bengal Circle has stonewalled my request for the list of 7th.BPs.So long as we get the parity (50/40) from the date of retirement that should satisfy us.Meanwhile let us explore other ways of getting the list since not much can be expected from PenAss,Bengal Circle except possibly some lip sympathy.Sujoy Kumar Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,

We are indeed surprised by your unkind and incorrect comments. We are not aware how our Association has stonewalled your attempts. We did not expect such sweeping remarks from you. Please drop in at our office and collect the requisite data, which, can be gathered from the PPG Deptt.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 21-05-2014 5:41 pm:

 7th BP Pension Issue
Dear Sujoy as a rejoinder to the views expressed by Mr ARC just I want to tell that let the legal battle go on in the Courts filed on the issue of SBI pensioners which is for fixation of pension at 50%. Our PENFED Gen Secy during his meeting with our Chairman sometime during Feb this year had appealed to her to take up the 7th BP retirees issue with the Govt FMinistry and it is learnt that she has took it up with the then FM. The detailed proposal submitted is in specific for solving the 7th BP retirees issue only relating to fixing up of pension on 7th BP scale.Perhaps the fixation of pension may be on the basis of 50/40 formula,I presume. Now she cannot recommend for sanction of pension on 50/50 formula but she may be able get through the already pending proposal with the Govt. It will eliminate the disparity between 7th and 8th/9th BP retirees. U can also get the neutralization approved. As the case filed by the PENFED which is pending in the courts is not specifically for the sake of 7th BP retirees no body -Our Bank, Govt,IBA or RBI-can say that the matter is subjudice as it is not relevant. On the above grounds why we can just approach our Chairman with an appeal to take up the case of 7th BP retirees with the Present Govt for approval. Please think it over.
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,

Such an approach has already been made to the Chairman. She had assured of some develpment, after provisioning is done for NPAs, in the concluded financial year. Let us see what the new year holds for us, pensioners.

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 >

go to top